OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training and physical therapy interventions in patients with low back pain.
DATA SOURCES: The Ovid-Medline, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PEDro databases were searched for randomised, controlled trials published in English or Korean between database inception and September 2024.
REVIEW METHODS: Studies providing pelvic floor muscle training in individuals with low back pain were included. The risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software 5.4.
RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in this review. Pelvic floor muscle training showed low certainty evidence for improving pain (standardised mean difference = -0.73, 95% CI [-1.10, -0.36]) and reflected a clinically meaningful reduction in pain. The evidence for disability improvement had a low certainty (mean difference = -5.21, 95% CI [-7.15, -3.26]) due to high heterogeneity. Substantial improvements in pain and disability were observed when pelvic floor muscle training was added to standard physical therapy, with low certainty of evidence supporting these findings. Whereas pelvic floor muscle training substantially improved pain compared to other interventions, there was no marked improvement in disability.
CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor muscle training is potentially beneficial in addition to physical therapy for reducing low back pain, particularly in pregnancy-related cases. However, the evidence should be interpreted considering the quality and risk of bias.
| Discipline Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Physician |  |
| Rehab Clinician (OT/PT) | |
Rehab Clinician (OT/PT) rater
The article suggests that pelvic muscle training may be more appropriate in addition to standard physiotherapy for low back pain, rather than alone. However, the heterogeneity of the included studies limits the generalizability of the findings.
, McMaster University